And Show Us Your Rare Sheaffer's

[sheafferkid]

I got delivery today of a rare bird purchased on eBay late last week. Its a Sheaffer Balance Masterpiece. Its properly marked Sheaffer's and has the correct period font for the 14k hallmarks so I'm quite certain it isn't a jeweler's pen. The strange thing is that the feed and nib just seem to be 7 or 8 years later than the body and clip style. The clip screams 1932-1934 but I expected to find a flat feed and numbered Lifetime nib. I'm left wondering if the jewelry department at Sheaffer's lived on another planet with a different set of realities. That would figure as their production was low, costly and therefore specialized.

 

PeteWK

 

Wow! I didn't even know Sheaffer's made those! That would have been an expensive pen back then. That is too cool!

 

Evan

 

[Guest PeteWK]

I got delivery today of a rare bird purchased on eBay late last week. Its a Sheaffer Balance Masterpiece. Its properly marked Sheaffer's and has the correct period font for the 14k hallmarks so I'm quite certain it isn't a jeweler's pen. The strange thing is that the feed and nib just seem to be 7 or 8 years later than the body and clip style. The clip screams 1932-1934 but I expected to find a flat feed and numbered Lifetime nib. I'm left wondering if the jewelry department at Sheaffer's lived on another planet with a different set of realities. That would figure as their production was low, costly and therefore specialized.

 

PeteWK

This is the typical configuration of the all-gold Balance-style pen. Sheaffer used this clip style on 14K pens they sold well into the 1940s.

 

In general, one should be cautious about assigning bracketed time periods (e.g. 1932-1934) to pen models or features, because it is illusory to consider the start date and the end date as being of the same class. Typically, the start date cited is indeed the start date -- date of first appearance. But the end date is almost never an end data at all -- it's actually the start date of the next version of that model or feature. The trap is thinking that when a new version of a feature or pen was introduced, that correlated with a termination of the older version of the feature or pen. Though the manufacturer's literature may give that impression -- they were trying to sell the newer version -- what was actually being made, assembled, and sold is usually quite different. Numerous examples demonstrate this principle -- flat-tops from 1937+, Jade pens from 1939+, etc.

 

--Daniel

 

 

 

 

Perhaps, but the confusion comes when one wonders why Sheaffer would compete against their new models by continuing to make the old. It would make sense if they were selling back stock but I can't say for sure. 1941 catalog page included. Same form, different clip.

 

PeteWK

[david i]

It is known for Parker at least that older style pens were produced even in the face of newer style pens. First Generation Vacumatic production continued into the 2nd generation era.

 

best

 

david

 

[Guest PeteWK]

It is known for Parker at least that older style pens were produced even in the face of newer style pens. First Generation Vacumatic production continued into the 2nd generation era.

 

best

 

david

 

I've certainly heard that about Sheaffer as well. But then this being a specialized pen, I'm unsure. I've been told that Sheaffer had a rather small group of employees who made the solid gold stuff. It may be that they were the best pulled of the assembly line or that they had their own department. Don't know for sure. But knowing that Sheaffer had a tiny number of nibmakers their entire existence it would made sense that a similar number would be the case for the pocket jewelry.

 

On a note closer to home, I took the pen in to Fred's shop this morning and had the pen lightly refurbed. Found out some things I didn't expect. The pen is solid gold rather than overlay. The lever bar is also 14k and seems to be unique to this pen, though you might find one from the 1920s. More rounded edges than normal. Also, the section has an interesting white metal portion where it fits into the top of the barrel. It reminds me of what Wahl did in the late 1920s. It certainly has to do with adding stability to the connection between the threads and section.

 

One last thing is that the cap is tapered rather than straight on the 1941 Masterpiece shown in the above picture.

 

PeteWK

[Guest PeteWK]

This is the typical configuration of the all-gold Balance-style pen. Sheaffer used this clip style on 14K pens they sold well into the 1940s.--Daniel

 

 

 

I'd very much like to know where that information comes from. The Masterpieces I've seen from the 1940s have all been of the Crest variety in one evolving form or another. When Fred Krinke did the sac on it today he suggested that I consider changing the feed and nib to an original variety, he being of the impression that it had been changed somewhere along the pen's lifetime. We than had a long conversation about the various possibilities and decided to leave well enough alone with the exception of the nib, which I replaced with the exact model it had in it though without the small crack the supplied one had. Fred actually sold Masterpiece pens in the 1940s and doesn't recall seeing any with that clip style, though that doesn't prove Sheaffer didn't make any at the time.

 

PeteWK

Edited April 25, 2007 by PeteWK

[kirchh]

This is the typical configuration of the all-gold Balance-style pen. Sheaffer used this clip style on 14K pens they sold well into the 1940s.--Daniel

I'd very much like to know where that information comes from. The Masterpieces I've seen from the 1940s have all been of the Crest variety in one evolving form or another.

The information comes from my observations; all the Balance-style 14K pens I've seen have had the round-ball clip, regardless of their apparent era of sale.

 

When Fred Krinke did the sac on it today he suggested that I consider changing the section and nib to an original variety, he being of the impression that it had been changed somewhere along the pen's lifetime.

I find that conclusion regarding the section to be very unlikely. The section is of the same type as seen on other examples of this model. What other pen would this section properly belong in instead, and what type of section should be in this pen instead?

 

Fred actually sold Masterpiece pens in the 1940s and doesn't recall seeing any with that clip style, though that doesn't prove Sheaffer didn't make any at the time.

He's probably thinking of the Crest-style Masterpiece pens, not the Balance-style 14K pens (which may or may not have been labeled 'Masterpiece').

 

--Daniel

Edited April 24, 2007 by kirchh

[Guest PeteWK]

Meant to say "feed and nib" and not "section and nib". As for all those 14k Balance pens out there, I haven't seen too many of them. How many have you seen in your many, many years in the field? That assertion would be a lot more convincing if there were a picture in a jeweler's catalog or something of the kind.

 

And my point about the 14k pens in the 1940s is that Fred sold some at the shop (not many, though) and didn't recall seeing the ball clip during that decade. You and I weren't even alive during that decade.

[Roger W.]

Pete and Daniel;

 

While Fred may not recall seeing any that does not negate there having been some limited production. In the first few decades most lines fade gradually away, most! There are a few exceptions to this as when the limited gauranty pens came in the Secretary, 46's and 22's were ended, they do not fade away and probably had their last days in late '27. This is actually quite exceptional stuff for Sheaffer as few things ever ended in such a sudden way.

 

There is not a dearth of evidence to support Daniel's claim, however, he has the most knowledge of balances of anyone out there today. If he feels the evidence supports late ball clips I'm willing to let him run with that until irrefutible facts point against it. I was tempted to win the pen Pete won but, thought resources better placed this year. Daniels' gold balance is the only other one I was aware of prior to this latest offering. Mighty tempting to give you a run for your money, Pete mighty tempting and you know I can do it if my mind is set to it. Anyway, glad you have it, at least it is in the fold of those that will share data which will enrich us all.

 

Roger W.

[kirchh]

As for all those 14k Balance pens out there, I haven't seen too many of them. How many have you seen in your many, many years in the field?

I've handled or seen photos of four or five.

 

That assertion would be a lot more convincing if there were a picture in a jeweler's catalog or something of the kind.

I'm not sure which assertion you're referring to. Every example I've seen of this model, including at least one likely sold in the '40s, has had the same clip style, so I feel it is reasonable to assert that the clip is typical for that model.

 

And my point about the 14k pens in the 1940s is that Fred sold some at the shop (not many, though) and didn't recall seeing the ball clip during that decade. You and I weren't even alive during that decade.

The fact that I was not alive during the eras when the pens I study were sold does not impair my ability to examine and assess evidence, of course. My observations that these pens typically bore round-ball clips and were sold well into the 1940s are entirely consistent with Fred's recollection of events from 60 years ago (Fred started full-time at the shop in '47).

 

--Daniel

Edited April 27, 2007 by kirchh

[penpalace]

I got delivery today of a rare bird purchased on eBay late last week. Its a Sheaffer Balance Masterpiece. Its properly marked Sheaffer's and has the correct period font for the 14k hallmarks so I'm quite certain it isn't a jeweler's pen. The strange thing is that the feed and nib just seem to be 7 or 8 years later than the body and clip style. The clip screams 1932-1934 but I expected to find a flat feed and numbered Lifetime nib. I'm left wondering if the jewelry department at Sheaffer's lived on another planet with a different set of realities. That would figure as their production was low, costly and therefore specialized.

 

PeteWK

 

 

A stunning Pen Pete. After seeing these pens on ebay (roseglow set, PFM auto and this) it's going to get harder and harder for me to visit this section of the board...Oh well can't afford them all, it's actually quite amazing that you've been able to add those three pieces to your collection in such a short period of time!

 

Pearce.

[Guest PeteWK]

I got delivery today of a rare bird purchased on eBay late last week. Its a Sheaffer Balance Masterpiece. Its properly marked Sheaffer's and has the correct period font for the 14k hallmarks so I'm quite certain it isn't a jeweler's pen. The strange thing is that the feed and nib just seem to be 7 or 8 years later than the body and clip style. The clip screams 1932-1934 but I expected to find a flat feed and numbered Lifetime nib. I'm left wondering if the jewelry department at Sheaffer's lived on another planet with a different set of realities. That would figure as their production was low, costly and therefore specialized.

 

PeteWK

 

 

A stunning Pen Pete. After seeing these pens on ebay (roseglow set, PFM auto and this) it's going to get harder and harder for me to visit this section of the board...Oh well can't afford them all, it's actually quite amazing that you've been able to add those three pieces to your collection in such a short period of time!

 

Pearce.

 

 

Thanks Pearce. The fact that I've added them in a short time wasn't lost on my wife, either. But the reality for me is that I'm "allowed" to purchase anything my little heart desires and at whatever price I deem reasonable only being limited by my willingness to part with or liquidate some other part of my collection. The hard part is deciding what stays and what goes.

 

PeteWK

[Guest PeteWK]

As for all those 14k Balance pens out there, I haven't seen too many of them. How many have you seen in your many, many years in the field?

I've handled or seen photos of four or five.

 

That assertion would be a lot more convincing if there were a picture in a jeweler's catalog or something of the kind.

I'm not sure which assertion you're referring to. Every example I've seen of this model, including at least one likely from the '40s, has had the same clip style, so I feel it is reasonable to assert that the clip is typical for that model.

 

And my point about the 14k pens in the 1940s is that Fred sold some at the shop (not many, though) and didn't recall seeing the ball clip during that decade. You and I weren't even alive during that decade.

The fact that I was not alive during the eras when the pens I study were sold does not impair my ability to examine and assess evidence, of course. My observations that these pens typically bore round-ball clips and were sold well into the 1940s are entirely consistent with Fred's recollection of events from 60 years ago (Fred started full-time at the shop in '47).

 

--Daniel

 

At the very least this post will be illustrative of my primary point of divergence. I seriously doubt that Sheaffer made this gold pen INTO the 1940s. Perhaps up until 1940 or 1941 when the new model came out. I would lean toward Sheaffer continuing to sell new old stock pens they had on hand.

 

As for numbers, the 4 or 5 you've seen isn't a large enough sampling statistically and it certainly doesn't affix a date to manufacture.

 

Fred recallled selling them rarely, maybe one a year. And the Fountain Pen Store (when it was in downtown L.A.) was a large and going concern. One might assume that they sold 10-15 solid gold balances during their product run. Ad to that the fact that they were almost always special order items. Sheaffer would be contacted to either supply one from their stock (often monogrammed by Sheaffer) or custom make one to order.

 

Jewelry stores were the prime location to actually find one in stock as some of them stilll do.

 

And if one multiplies the number of larger pen stores selling one every year or so the numbers do add up. A good guess would be in the low thousands I would think. Some number were melted down (I've heard that sad story!) while others are tucked away in safe-deposit boxes.

 

We certainly need to see more than .1% of the sample before a pronouncement can be made.

 

I would be very interested in seeing a picture of yours on the FPN

 

PeteWK

[Guest PeteWK]

Pete and Daniel;

Mighty tempting to give you a run for your money, Pete mighty tempting and you know I can do it if my mind is set to it. Anyway, glad you have it, at least it is in the fold of those that will share data which will enrich us all.

 

Roger W.

 

 

Roger, your bid would have had to have been very high to have taken this pen away from me. I simply decided what I was willing to pay for it and used eSnipe.com to bid for me. Its the only way to go.

 

PeteWK

[kirchh]

As for all those 14k Balance pens out there, I haven't seen too many of them. How many have you seen in your many, many years in the field?

I've handled or seen photos of four or five.

 

That assertion would be a lot more convincing if there were a picture in a jeweler's catalog or something of the kind.

I'm not sure which assertion you're referring to. Every example I've seen of this model, including at least one likely from the '40s, has had the same clip style, so I feel it is reasonable to assert that the clip is typical for that model.

 

And my point about the 14k pens in the 1940s is that Fred sold some at the shop (not many, though) and didn't recall seeing the ball clip during that decade. You and I weren't even alive during that decade.

The fact that I was not alive during the eras when the pens I study were sold does not impair my ability to examine and assess evidence, of course. My observations that these pens typically bore round-ball clips and were sold well into the 1940s are entirely consistent with Fred's recollection of events from 60 years ago (Fred started full-time at the shop in '47).

 

--Daniel

 

At the very least this post will be illustrative of my primary point of divergence. I seriously doubt that Sheaffer made this gold pen INTO the 1940s.

I didn't say that Sheaffer made this gold pen into the 1940s in large numbers, though I believe some were likely sold well into the 1940s.

 

As for numbers, the 4 or 5 you've seen...

Including your pen, the total is 5 or 6.

 

...isn't a large enough sampling statistically...

That's an interesting claim. What calculations did you use to assess the probability of five random samples all exhibiting an atypical configuration (defining atypical as, say, constituting less than 20% of the population)?

 

...and it certainly doesn't affix a date to manufacture.

I don't understand this observation at all -- I certainly did not claim that somehow the number of pens I'd seen was evidence for a particular manufacturing date.

 

Fred recallled selling them rarely, maybe one a year. And the Fountain Pen Store (when it was in downtown L.A.) was a large and going concern. One might assume that they sold 10-15 solid gold balances during their product run. Ad to that the fact that they were almost always special order items. Sheaffer would be contacted to either supply one from their stock (often monogrammed by Sheaffer) or custom make one to order.

 

Jewelry stores were the prime location to actually find one in stock as some of them stilll do.

 

And if one multiplies the number of larger pen stores selling one every year or so the numbers do add up. A good guess would be in the low thousands I would think. Some number were melted down (I've heard that sad story!) while others are tucked away in safe-deposit boxes.

 

We certainly need to see more than .1% of the sample before a pronouncement can be made.

I'm not sure you're familiar with sampling theory, as you seem to imply here that the ratio of sample size to total population is controlling when it comes to determining statistical significance. For example, by your reasoning, an opinion poll of voting-age adults in the US that used a sample of 0.1% of that population wouldn't be statistically significant.

 

Again, I would be interested in seeing your calculations of the probability of randomly sampling five members of a relatively large population and having all five members share an atypical (<20%) attribute.

 

--Daniel

Edited April 26, 2007 by kirchh

[penpalace]

I do think it's incredibly hard to calculate statistics on the number of any uncommon pen that was actually made without numbers from Sheaffer themselves. My stats knowledge I'm sure is trumpted by many on this board but I got a few years at the University level and know enough to know that we are all just taking a guess based on the statistics that WE know.

A friend of the families that his job is basically to rip apart other peoples collected stats, because we all know you can use statistics to prove or disprove anything (but it doesn't mean that its the case).

I had a prof a few years ago come from half way across the country to give us a talk about his take on evolution. The first thing he came out and said was 75% of people in the medical field believe there is some kind of higher power or being...well you get the point, (and by no means am I now trying to spur on some sort of religious debate).

 

Pearce.

 

[kirchh]

I do think it's incredibly hard to calculate statistics on the number of any uncommon pen that was actually made without numbers from Sheaffer themselves. My stats knowledge I'm sure is trumpted by many on this board but I got a few years at the University level and know enough to know that we are all just taking a guess based on the statistics that WE know.

A friend of the families that his job is basically to rip apart other peoples collected stats, because we all know you can use statistics to prove or disprove anything (but it doesn't mean that its the case).

I had a prof a few years ago come from half way across the country to give us a talk about his take on evolution. The first thing he came out and said was 75% of people in the medical field believe there is some kind of higher power or being...well you get the point, (and by no means am I now trying to spur on some sort of religious debate).

 

Pearce.

It is indeed difficult to calculate statistics on the number made of a given pen model without the manufacturer's data, but that is not the issue being discussed here. Rather, we are examining whether it can be asserted with statistical significance that a random sample of five items sharing an attribute is an indication that the attribute is typical (which I am quantifying for the sake of discussion as occurring in 20% or more of the population).

 

Statistics can't be used to prove or disprove anything one chooses, though in many cases they can be incorporated into an argument that attempts to show something desired, which is a different matter. I don't agree that we are all just "taking a guess"; we can still use the tools of probability and statistics to help us do better than guess, and they also allow us to understand the degree of confidence that is reasonably placed on our assessments. Indeed, that's the question here -- whether probability and statistics theory support a conclusion (that is, whether the data presented are statistically significant) given the various parameters involved. That issue can be examined independent of whether or not we have access to manufacturers' data.

 

--Daniel

[DWL]

While certainly nowhere even close to rare, but possibly in the less commonly encountered club. This first or second year Black & Pearl Balance has awesome color.

[penpalace]

I do think it's incredibly hard to calculate statistics on the number of any uncommon pen that was actually made without numbers from Sheaffer themselves. My stats knowledge I'm sure is trumpted by many on this board but I got a few years at the University level and know enough to know that we are all just taking a guess based on the statistics that WE know.

A friend of the families that his job is basically to rip apart other peoples collected stats, because we all know you can use statistics to prove or disprove anything (but it doesn't mean that its the case).

I had a prof a few years ago come from half way across the country to give us a talk about his take on evolution. The first thing he came out and said was 75% of people in the medical field believe there is some kind of higher power or being...well you get the point, (and by no means am I now trying to spur on some sort of religious debate).

 

Pearce.

It is indeed difficult to calculate statistics on the number made of a given pen model without the manufacturer's data, but that is not the issue being discussed here. Rather, we are examining whether it can be asserted with statistical significance that a random sample of five items sharing an attribute is an indication that the attribute is typical (which I am quantifying for the sake of discussion as occurring in 20% or more of the population).

 

Statistics can't be used to prove or disprove anything one chooses, though in many cases they can be incorporated into an argument that attempts to show something desired, which is a different matter. I don't agree that we are all just "taking a guess"; we can still use the tools of probability and statistics to help us do better than guess, and they also allow us to understand the degree of confidence that is reasonably placed on our assessments. Indeed, that's the question here -- whether probability and statistics theory support a conclusion (that is, whether the data presented are statistically significant) given the various parameters involved. That issue can be examined independent of whether or not we have access to manufacturers' data.

 

--Daniel

 

Daniel,

 

My fault for using the world "taking a guess", I only meant that using that using the stats that you have calculated that one is not positively sure but taking THEIR best guess at that case. Nor did I mean to deminish in any way the calculations that either of you had made.

 

Pearce.

 

[Guest PeteWK]

Daniel, would you care to take a guess at how many "sure things" in the fountain pen world were later debunked as new evidence emerges? All one has to do is read the old books in this field and it becomes apparent.

 

As for statistics, I had to take it in college as well as Pearce. The issue in this one small sliver of our discussion is that a Scientific Sample must be chosen before any conclusion can be drawn. In politics, a company doing the poll lays out a careful plan to question certain numbers of each group involved (ie gender, ethnicity, culture etc). Very often to gain an accurate sampling, two polls are taken at the same time and compared to establish the variance. It would be lunacy to merely stop after calling 5 or 6 random people and proclaim the answer. Mark Twain's words ring true, "There are lies, damnable lies and statistics".

 

I realize we don't have the phone number of the pen owners in question but you get the idea.

 

Also, your penchant for avoiding the issued being discussed and branching off on some tangent to avoid the issue at hand is pretty typical of your discourse. Try and stay focused

[Guest PeteWK]

Kirchh said, "I don't understand this observation at all -- I certainly did not claim that somehow the number of pens I'd seen was evidence for a particular manufacturing date."

 

In fact you started this whole manufactured argument with the comment, "This is the typical configuration of the all-gold Balance-style pen. Sheaffer used this clip style on 14K pens they sold well into the 1940s."

 

That's total BS and you have nothing to support it. In fact, all the evidence currently available points to the pens being made in the 1930s. And please don't cop out and claim you were saying they were being SOLD during that time and not made. That wouldn't be in keeping with your claim that, "Though the manufacturer's literature may give that impression -- they were trying to sell the newer version -- what was actually being MADE, assembled, and sold is usually quite different. Numerous examples demonstrate this principle -- flat-tops from 1937+, Jade pens from 1939+, etc."

 

It would make a lot more sense to say that Sheaffer made a stock of them over a year or two and then sold them when an order came in. Perhaps even adding whatever nib and feed were current at the time.

 

You see, this is called reason and logic. I await your next post where you tear off on a tangent designed to divert attention from the issues at hand.

 

Oh, and I'm still waiting for a picture of the pen Roger says you have.